On Mon, 4 Mar 2024 15:02:45 GMT, Aleksei Efimov <aefi...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>>> As for the test, I had a closer look now and I find it hard to separate >>> testing of [JDK-8314063](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8314063) from >>> [JDK-8325579](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8325579). Furthermore, >>> most of the entries test things that hadn't been addressed by any of these >>> two bugs at all. >>> >>> So, [JDK-8314063](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8314063) is only >>> tested in lines 72, 73, 76 and 77 The original problem of this issue >>> [JDK-8325579](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8325579) is touched in >>> line 71 and 73. >>> >>> That means, most of the other test invocations test some generic behavior >>> which was never erroneous so far. >> >> Thanks for exploring the possibility of improving tracebility of test >> invocations to reported bugs. >> >>> I could, however, give each line its own test id and annotate the bugs >>> accordingly. Do you think that makes sense? >> >> It does make sense, but I'm not sure how such annotations will look like and >> if it will be easy to use them for debugging failures. I will leave the >> final decision to you here. Your last message with linkage of test >> invocations to bug id is already a good information to have. >> >>> I drafted a CSR. @AlekseiEfimov, would be nice if you could review it. >> >> Thanks for drafting a CSR. I will review it in comming days. > >> Thanks for exploring the possibility of improving tracebility of test >> invocations to reported bugs. >> >> > > > I've given this test change a second thought, maybe you can try to separate > the test into two separate test classes? One possibility to avoid duplicating > code and have a separate test for each bug is to introduce a base test class > that will contain the common functionality for > [JDK-8314063](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8314063) and > [JDK-8325579](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8325579) tests. Thanks @AlekseiEfimov and @dfuch for the reviews. Submitting this now. ------------- PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/17797#issuecomment-2018412400
